About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
something against the american government. they had a heated argument about u.s. foreign policy. nice to see you, sir. >> hey, nice to see you. >> tell me, how did you first meet the two brothers? was it just living in the same building in is that how you knew them? >> i met the older brother two weeks prior into moving into the apartment under them. i met him at a pizza is shop across from my high school. >> what was tamerlan like? >> my first interaction with him was he was sitting at a table at a pizza shop across my high school and he was talking to another kid that used to go to cambridge latin high school. i overheard the conversation and he was basically explaining the koran to the person he was sitting with and the differences between the bible and the koran. i noticed in a way he was idolizing the koran and trash talking the bible. i was very interested in the topic and i didn't know much about religion, whether it's christianity or islam, and he seemed like he was very well-educated about both so i wanted to join the argument or the discussion. so, yeah, i basically joined the disc
security and foreign policy issues as opposed to his very robust domestic agenda? jon: lindsey graham was on with his last hour and pretty critical about the job the department of homeland security -- which, after all, is an arm of the administration -- did in the tsarnaev case. want to play a clip. >> my problem with this administration is their policies are failing. they do not believe that we're at war. they ignored signs and warnings from libya. we haven't had one person detained as an enemy combatant for intelligence-gathering purposes since he's been president. jon: is this starting to resonate with voters, do you think? >> i don't know yet that we've seen that. but we could see it over time. i think it pretty much depends on how the public views the president's handling of these incidents, and do they think that the president is keeping them safe. as we saw under president bush, you can have a horrific attack on the home lambed, and if you respond -- homeland, and if you respond in a way the public feels you should respond, they like your response, they're going to feel good ab
's not rocket science. it's just common sense. >>> let's bring in mike, staff writer and celeste, foreign policy analyst from the department of labor's occupational safety and health administration. great to have you both here. when you heard about this, mike and started looking through the osha records, i saw it from your reporting, were you surprised it had been so long since osha inspected the plant? >> no. literally the plant had not been inspected in my lifetime, literally not since 1985. there's not enough osha inspector inspectors for the country. there are so few in texas, it would take 98 years for them to inspect every place once. it didn't surprise me. typically there's only an inspector when a worker calls up and complains and typically only in a union workplace. >> it's a complaint and people come out and not like doors on hazardous work sites. >> occasionally, not that often. >> what is the standard. you would think a fertiliz fertilizer -- about 20 employees in this west fertilizer warehouse where this happened. what is this standard that would prompt a heightened level of scrutin
not only a lost opportunity domestically. the foreign policy of this also. the most interesting thing that reagan did early on in foreign policy was the air traffic controller strike and toughness at times at home have repercussions aboeroad. this story got lost because of the boston bombings. >> but helps new awax. you only have to send that message once or twice to have one person go back and go, he is crazy. you know what he just told me? he said he was going to destroy me. >> what the president, what president obama, for reasons not only to him and his nature, clearly does not do or cannot do is something that lyndon johnson did do and this story has been repeated too many times for it not to be apockrifal. frank church a senator from idaho opposed senator johnson on an element of vietnam policy and another senator, i forget which one, wanted a line in an appropriations bill for a dam in his state. and he was on the fence with regard to lyndon johnson's view on vietnam policy. he called the president specifically asking, i need this. kou help me get it? and the president of the un
by presidents. this is just on the domestic side. on the foreign-policy side presidents have even more power. the president plays a far larger role in the determination of u.s. policy and congress plays a far smaller role than the framers intended. the recent illustration is president obama decided our military would be involved in intervening in libya would be his decision even though congress is supposed to decide when we send troops into battle. but obama and many presidents have decided on their own without waiting for congress. presidents also reach agreements with other countries without congressional participation unilaterally decide about terminating a treaty when we change from recognizing taiwan as a government to mainland china. it was president carter who unilaterally terminated the mutual defense in taiwan. presidents decide on their own whether allowing u.s. citizens to travel abroad. it was a presidential decision. he also revived our immigration policy. when congress failed to create a path for young immigrants to be brought and -- president implemented his own d.r.e.a.m. act
a lot to make america safer, but we are not yet safe. and clearly, because of our foreign policy, because of the freedoms we enjoy, there are individuals here in this country and certainly around the world who do not like america. they want to bring harm to america. and it's for that reason that we do have all of the laws we have put in place following 9/11 to ensure that we make america safe as possible, consistent with the protections provided under the constitution. >> okay. but do you think new york police commissioner chief ray kelly, who is probably one of the greatest in the history of the city, all right, really. they, of course, have a whole anti-terrorism, counterterrorism unit. they also, general gonzalez, they also monitor the muslim community. that is not to say that all muslims are radical jihadists, but they do monitor the muslim community. they take a lot of flack for it from liberals and left and certain media people. but that's what they do. when you look at this story, sir, in a sense, i hate to say this, but it's all the same. all these things. young, radical
foreign policy discussions. we're not a country that's in the mood to go invade anyone anymore. the tsarnaev brothers have been in the united states much longer. they were really immigrants and the fact that they come from chechnya, a place that's been at war with russia has in some ways softened the response. so far at least, i think we have not seen as much anti-muslim kind of talk as there was after 9/11. >> i think you're absolutely right. there's been some. there's been some of that almost knee jerk reaction, which obviously is a problem, but nothing like what occurred immediately after 9/11. isn't that right? >> yeah. i also think -- there are a billion muslims in the world. muslims come in every shape and color. in the american imagination, we have almost racialized what it means to be muslim. the fact these guys are from chechn chechnya under mines the level of racist reactions. to some degree part of what the anti-muslim sentiment after 9/11 was not only based on religion, but it was based on the idea of race and ethnicity. >> thanks very much for coming in. >> thank y
and we could concentrate solely on traditional foreign policy threats like iran and syria and the instability of the korean peninsula. of course those threats remain large but this shows we are still a country in terrorist cross hairs both from abroad and from within. >> it sounds like you think this will reshape our focus as well. >> i think it will, no question about that. but at the same time we've got to make sure that we don't single out one particular community for attack and os t tracism. >> it's very common for them to sfwring we don't care at all to we exaggerate the threat. this is a common pendulum swing. it's also a mistake. and what we've also seen, just in the last week, is most of the coverage and most of the discussion by elites on both side of the aisle has been far more measured than what you just read by representative king. >> but it was measured because we were still a country in crisis. now that it seems that the crisis, perhaps, has subsided, now the nuts will come out. >> that's true, and this is where the media plays an even bigger role. in the mon
would you pursue to the domestic and foreign policy? >> i want to thank you for hosting this debate. it is a great honor to be here an i want thank my colleague for being here as well. i want of offer my condolences to all the families of all the victims and offer my thanks to the first responders, the doctors, the nurse, our citizens who, i think behaved so valley lently and in such a compassionate way. it's been a long week. my thoughts and prayers are with those who are recovering. i will continue to do what what i've have been doing on homeland security issues. one of the differences between myself and mr. markey is our voting record on homeland security. i think one of the great parts of what happened this week in terms of the rescue and the coordination and the capture of these terrorists was the coordination between the different agency, the joint terrorism task force. task to create the force. mr. markey vote against that proposal. i voted for funding for homeland security. mr. markey voted against that. i will continue my priorities that i have. it is probably why the fir
, what specific changes would you pursue in our domestic and foreign policies o make us safer? >> first, i want to thank you for hosting this debate. i also want to thank my colleague, ed markey, for being here as well. before we begin, i just want to offer my condolences to all the families of all the victims and offer my thanks to the first responders, to the docs, nurses, to our citizens who i think behaved so valiantly in such a compassionate way during this past week. it's been a long week. again, my thoughts and prayers are with all those who are recovering. in terms of what i would do, i would continue to do what i have been doing on homeland security issues. i think one of the stark differences between myself and mr. markey is our voting record on homeland security. i think one of the great parts of what happened this week in terms of the rescue and the coordination and the capture of these terrorists was the coordination between the different agencies, the joint terrorism task force. i voted to create the joint terrorism task force. mr. markey voted against that proposal. repea
. and really at the heart of it is the fact that one of obama's enduring legacies when it comes to foreign policy, he has solidified assassination as an essential component of policy. >> they can do it in the shadows, as you pointed out. in the book, i would say there hasn't been a lot of public resistance aside from people like you and others in the press. how have they done this without facing much resistance? publicly or inside the government from people who should be stepping up and saying, wait a minute, we can't kill u.s. citizens without due process? >> right, i think there's no question that if john mccain had won the election in 2008 or mitt romney had won it in 2012 that liberals would be screaming about this stuff and saying, you know, that -- there would be this thing, war crimes, we should do impeachment and the reality is that i think a lot of people -- and i think this is sincere. a lot of people so fed up with the iraq war, perceived as the sort of crimes of the bush administration they wanted it to end and the obama administration has sold people a bill of goods. the idea
right or wrong, you'll never get in trouble. if you want to be critical of foreign policy because you belief, as a citizen -- remember, we have a thing called the constitution. all men are created equal. everybody, at least from the beginning, white, male, 2 1, with property, could vote. since then we've expanded -- well, i'm not being sarcastic because in terms of the world to have any white male who was sovereign, that we were sovereign. the american revolution declared the people sovereign rather than a king or queen. you couldn't have a king or queen taking your land away because they had finch it to you through sovereign rights. so if every citizen has a right to say what they should or should not do in our government, we would think we could respect that, and yet at the very beginning of the iraq war, when susan sarandon and tim robbins spoke out against the war, they had their invitation to talk to the baseball hall of fame withdrawn. and right after that i had a crew from fox news come to my house to interview me, because i don't go to the studios anymore. they want me? they
on foreign relations, previously was a project director for the 2009 independent task force on u.s. immigration policy and previously worked at the financial times with the washington bureau chief there. from norths us now branford, connecticut on our independent line. caller: good morning. i am in disagreement with your guest. he says there is no problem on immigration. watched c-span and heard the calls come in about immigration yucca guest: -- host: they are against immigration? let's let him give his take on the immigration issue. talkinge have been about the boston issue. that is a screening history. there is a broader issue of immigration reform in washington. we have an 840 four page bill drawn up by the so-called gang of eight. hearing in the senate judiciary committee today. this is a big bill and raises issues far beyond the boston bombings. if you actually look at public opinion polls, most americans either say we have enough immigration now, or somewhat too much. it is a small minority of americans calling for more immigration. generally, americans are happy with the
to be critical of foreign policy because you believe as a citizen we have a thing called the constitution. all men are created equal. everyone from the beginning white, male. since then we've expanded. i'm not being sarcastic because in terms of the world to have any white male who is sovereign, the american people declared it rather than a king or queen. you couldn't of a king or queen taking your land away because they had given it to use your sovereign rights of everyone has a right to say what they should or should not do in our government we should expect that and yet at the beginning of the iraq war map when they spoke out against the war they had their invitation to talk to the baseball hall of fame and right after that i had a crew from fox news come to my house to interview me because i don't come to the studio anymore. if they want me they can come to my house. the first question the reporter susan sarandon onu think tim traders'. i turned to her and i said when did i stop beating my life. we want to let you know how this plays out we went on the air and i tried to explain how every
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)